Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Enable PowerApps MDA Classic Input controls for Custom Pages with Test Engine Support #501

Open
wants to merge 5 commits into
base: integration
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

v-raghulraja
Copy link

@v-raghulraja v-raghulraja commented Dec 10, 2024

Pull Request Template

Description

Please include a summary of the change and which issue is fixed. Please also include relevant motivation and context. List any dependencies that are required for this change.

Checklist

  • The code change is covered by unit tests. I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works
  • I have performed end-to-end test locally.
  • New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes
  • I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
  • I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
  • My changes generate no new warnings
  • I used clear names for everything
  • I have performed a self-review of my own code

@v-raghulraja v-raghulraja requested a review from a team as a code owner December 10, 2024 15:45
@v-raghulraja
Copy link
Author

#436 is the work item

@v-raghulraja v-raghulraja changed the title Intial Commit Enable PowerApps MDA Classic Input controls for Custom Pages with Test Engine Support Jan 2, 2025
var trueDateTime = new DateTime(1970, 1, 1, 0, 0, 0).AddMilliseconds(milliseconds);
var dateTimeOffset = DateTimeOffset.FromUnixTimeMilliseconds(milliseconds);
DateTime trueDateTime = dateTimeOffset.LocalDateTime;
//var trueDateTime = new DateTime(1970, 1, 1, 0, 0, 0).AddMilliseconds(milliseconds);

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Remove commented out line. Since seems like it is not needed, and this variable has been defined and initialized one line above.

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

done

@@ -208,11 +208,17 @@ public string CheckTestEngineObject
{
case "disabled":
case "visible":
case "checked":
return (T)(object)("{PropertyValue: " + value.ToString().ToLower() + "}");
default:
switch (value.GetType().ToString())
{
case "System.String":

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I wonder if nameof(System.String) works properly here instead.

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The nameof(System.String) approach won't work here because it evaluates to "String" instead of the fully qualified type name "System.String". Since value.GetType().ToString() returns the fully qualified type name, using nameof would cause a mismatch. Consider using value is string for a cleaner and more type-safe approach.

@@ -479,7 +485,7 @@ public async Task<bool> SetPropertyDateAsync(ItemPath itemPath, DateValue value)
// TODO - Set the Xrm SDK Value and update state for any JS to run
Copy link

@mcalderon00 mcalderon00 Jan 2, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is this // TODO comment still valid. Or can we remove it. This type of TODO comments (Tasks), is usually not useful, and I would prefer to have a work-item if something is missing to implement here.

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Created work item #519

Copy link

@mcalderon00 mcalderon00 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I left some simple / trivial comments.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants